 |
| Please scroll down the results page when search is completed. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
Risk and Exploration
Editor's Note: This is the second in a series of
essays on exploration by Steven J. Dick.
How
much risk should individuals and institutions take in the pursuit of
exploration?
It is a question that has been asked throughout history,
and at NASA every day, most recently with the deliberations following the
Columbia Space Shuttle accident (+ View Return to
Flight Page) and the cancellation of the Hubble Space Telescope shuttle
servicing mission (+ Read
More). At the end of September 2004 various aspects of the question were
pondered at NASA
Administrator Sean O'Keefe'sSymposium on "Risk
and Exploration: Earth, Sea and the Stars." Held at the Naval Postgraduate
School in Monterey, California, the gathering brought together a variety of risk
takers, ranging from mountain climbers to deep-sea divers and astronauts, and
several speakers who addressed history.
Image left: Astronaut John Grunsfeld at work during
the last Hubble Space Telescope servicing mission, in March of 2002. Photo
credit: NASA.
One of the organizers was NASA's own chief
scientist, John Grunsfeld (bio),
who knows something about risk. A veteran of four shuttle flights, and a
mountain climber, he is the last man to touch the Hubble Space Telescope on its
last servicing mission. The meeting was intended to draw on a wide variety of
experience inside and outside NASA in order to illuminate the question risk and
reward in exploration.
The Administrator posed the challenge on the first
day: knowing that a creative society should not forsake exploration, and knowing
this means undertaking bold ventures, how do we balance risk and rewards?
In opening remarks on public perception of risk, CNN science
correspondent Miles O'Brien noted that the public is not risk averse, and that
minimizing risk means minimizing public interest. Numerous speakers emphasized
that risk is everywhere, whether in marriage, investing, or aboard a spacecraft.
All agreed that risk should be mitigated to the extent possible. Apollo 13
astronaut Jim Lovell (bio)
pointed out that there is also a risk of too much mitigation, which he thought
was the case on his Gemini VII flight.
| The challenge: Knowing that a creative society should
not forsake exploration, and knowing this means undertaking bold ventures,
how do we balance risk and rewards? | Lovell
discussed the bold decision to send Apollo 8 to the Moon in December, 1968, only
three months after Apollo 7 had circled the Earth. And he described the
harrowing experiences of his crew when an oxygen tank on the Apollo 13 servicing
module exploded 200,000 miles from Earth, forcing the crew to use the lunar
module as a lifeboat (see his book "Lost Moon"). Lovell emphasized that events
leading to the Apollo 13 explosion actually began many years earlier when
decisions were made about the Apollo power system and thermostat, emphasizing
that a heritage of risk can build up over many years.
Similarly,
astronauts Shannon Lucid (bio)
and Michael Foale (bio)
recounted their experiences aboard the aging Mir Space Station, and the risks
they grappled with every day in the face of the unexpected. And Mike Gernhardt
(bio),
a veteran of four shuttle missions, discussed the risk-reward equation in more
mathematical terms, and in personal terms of whether a 25% decompression
sickness was an acceptable risk for EVA (extravehicular activity, or
spacewalk).
Jack Stuster, an anthropologist specializing in human
factors, and the author of "Bold Endeavors: Lessons from Polar and Space
Exploration," brought historical depth to the subject with a discussion of
voyages from Lewis and Clark to Arctic and Antarctic exploration. He argued that
some of these expeditions might serve as models for future long-duration human
space missions.
Laurence Bergreen, author of the recently published
"Over the Edge of the World: Magellan's Terrifying Circumnavigation of the
Globe," pointed out that on September 6, 1522 when the battered ship Victoria
returned to Spain, only one of five ships and 18 of 260 crew members had
survived the search for the Spice Islands -- and Magellan was not one of them.
This is obviously an unacceptable level of risk today, especially in pursuit of
something as mundane as spices (even though the economic value of cloves was
analogous to oil today). But it points out that the acceptance of risk changes
with time and culture. And, as one participant pointed out, "Exploration is a
spice more valuable than cloves."
Other speakers described the risks of
looking for life in extreme environments, whether in water under the Antarctic
ice, inside lava tubes, deep caves, or in high altitude lakes in the Andes
exceeding 20,000 feet.
NASA's Nathalie Cabrol described the harrowing
experience of diving without oxygen in these icy lakes, with her heartbeat
lowering to 39 beats per minute. She pointed out that in addition to being
valuable for astrobiology, the data is also valuable for heart research. These
explorers daily consider the risk and payoff equation in a most personal way.
One of the continual themes was that too much focus on a goal can cause safety
to be compromised.
High altitude mountaineer Ed Viesturs recounted how
on one of his expeditions to the top of Mt. Everest he decided to turn back due
to looming bad weather. Eight others, only 300 meters from the summit, pressed
ahead and perished. Emotion should not play a role in a risk decision, nor
should "groupthink", Viesturs cautioned, and to the extent possible explorers
should avoid putting themselves in a position where these factors can
dominate.
 Image right:
Astronaut Shannon Lucid works out on the treadmill during her six-month stay on
the Russian space station Mir in 1996. Photo credit: NASA.
Sylvia
Earle, founder and Chair of Deep Ocean Exploration and Research, Inc., and
veteran of numerous deep-sea dives, expressed her belief that we have become too
risk averse as a society. She pointed out that the Mariana Trench - the Everest
of the ocean - had not been visited since 1960. Only 5% of the oceans, the home
for 97% of life on Earth, has been explored. She emphasized that we should be
more concerned with not taking the risk, concluding that "what is really at risk
is our future." In this regard, 15th century Ming China, which pulled back from
exploration and suffered the consequences of diminished vitality for centuries
afterward, was mentioned more than once.
Jean Michel Cousteau pointed
out that NASA was created to pioneer the future, and that it should serve not
only a generator of new knowledge, but also a generator of national vitality. He
reminded the audience of a meeting at NASA Headquarters between his father,
Jacques Cousteau, and Wernher von Braun; curiosity animated them, he said, and
it should animate us now. James Cameron, relating his experiences in filming
"Titanic" and other ventures, concluded that the historical success of nations
rests on balancing risks and rewards. Still, "You have to be willing to accept
the idea of failure -- failure is part of exploration."
Risks in space
exploration were covered by a variety of speakers, including Steve Squyres
(principal investigator for the Mars
Exploration Rover Mission), Jim Garvin (NASA Chief Scientist for Mars and
the Moon), John Mather (Senior Project Scientist for the James Webb Space
Telescope), and John Grunsfeld, who spoke about the decision to cancel the
shuttle servicing mission for the Hubble Space Telescope.
The meeting was
memorable for many reasons, not least because a 6.0 earthquake shook the
auditorium on the second day. Most people (including Administrator O'Keefe),
kept their seats. But a few -- having calculated that the risk was too great --
headed for the back door! It was a poignant reminder that risk can be subjective
and a choice of the most personal kind.
|
|
|
|
